Climate change is a critical sustainable development issue with implications for the environment, economies and society as we know it. The problem of climate change is caused by some countries in parts of the world that has a direct effect on people and natural resources in other parts of the world. Climate change is the effect of increased production of Greenhouse gases (GHGs). Due to the vast complexity of the climate change regime the study does not attempt to be comprehensive or conclusive. The aim of the study is to critically evaluate and determine the purpose, enforceability, legal nature, shortcomings and strengths of the non-binding Copenhagen Accord and how the international climate change regime will evolve after the Copenhagen Accord. The study starts with a brief explanation of the international climate change regime and its development, including international environmental law principles, specifically the common but differentiated responsibility principle. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has the ultimate objective to achieve the stabilisation of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. The Conference of the Parties (COPs) is the ultimate decision-making and supreme body of the UNFCCC and is authorised to make and implement decisions to promote the implementation of the UNFCCC, it further has the power to adopt new protocols under the UNFCCC and plays a substantial role in the development of new obligations by the parties to the convention. Various COPs, their respective adopted decisions and resolutions which played an important role in the development of the climate change regime are discussed. This includes COP 1 that lead to the Berlin Mandate; COP 3 and the Kyoto Protocol; COP 7 and the Marrakech Accords; COP 11 that marked the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol; COP 13 and the Bali Action Plan. COP 15 in Copenhagen was internationally expected and intended to be the breakthrough in addressing the post 2012 period. As is evident from the content of this study the result of COP 15 at Copenhagen means different challenges for different countries and the “bottom up” architecture of the accord could help encourage and reinforce national actions. An overview of the effect of the Copenhagen Accord on the climate change regime, with specific reference to COP 16 in Cancun, is then done. The “bottom up” architecture of the Copenhagen Accord was brought into the official UNFCCC process by the Cancun Agreements that were reached at COP 16. The study mostly comprised of a literature study, which reviewed the relevant international environmental law dealing with climate change, taking into account customary international law; international treaties and conventions; government documents, policies and reports; textbooks and academic journals as well as electronic material obtained from various internet sources. / Thesis (LLM (Environmental Law and Governance))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012

Climate change is a critical sustainable development issue with implications for the environment, economies and society as we know it. The problem of climate change is caused by some countries in parts of the world that has a direct effect on people and natural resources in other parts of the world. Climate change is the effect of increased production of Greenhouse gases (GHGs). Due to the vast complexity of the climate change regime the study does not attempt to be comprehensive or conclusive. The aim of the study is to critically evaluate and determine the purpose, enforceability, legal nature, shortcomings and strengths of the non-binding Copenhagen Accord and how the international climate change regime will evolve after the Copenhagen Accord. The study starts with a brief explanation of the international climate change regime and its development, including international environmental law principles, specifically the common but differentiated responsibility principle. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has the ultimate objective to achieve the stabilisation of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. The Conference of the Parties (COPs) is the ultimate decision-making and supreme body of the UNFCCC and is authorised to make and implement decisions to promote the implementation of the UNFCCC, it further has the power to adopt new protocols under the UNFCCC and plays a substantial role in the development of new obligations by the parties to the convention. Various COPs, their respective adopted decisions and resolutions which played an important role in the development of the climate change regime are discussed. This includes COP 1 that lead to the Berlin Mandate; COP 3 and the Kyoto Protocol; COP 7 and the Marrakech Accords; COP 11 that marked the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol; COP 13 and the Bali Action Plan. COP 15 in Copenhagen was internationally expected and intended to be the breakthrough in addressing the post 2012 period. As is evident from the content of this study the result of COP 15 at Copenhagen means different challenges for different countries and the “bottom up” architecture of the accord could help encourage and reinforce national actions. An overview of the effect of the Copenhagen Accord on the climate change regime, with specific reference to COP 16 in Cancun, is then done. The “bottom up” architecture of the Copenhagen Accord was brought into the official UNFCCC process by the Cancun Agreements that were reached at COP 16. The study mostly comprised of a literature study, which reviewed the relevant international environmental law dealing with climate change, taking into account customary international law; international treaties and conventions; government documents, policies and reports; textbooks and academic journals as well as electronic material obtained from various internet sources. / Thesis (LLM (Environmental Law and Governance))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012

Chapter one offers an introduction and a general outline of argument. Chapter two lays out the current scholarship on human rights and the environment and presents rejoinders to three prominent lines of objection to linking human rights and environmental interests: conceptual, those arising from issues of recognition, vagueness and conflicts between human rights, ecological, especially from those seeking protections for the environment regardless of its utility to humans, and those wishing to expand human rights beyond human interests, and adjudication concerns, namely from those sceptical that the polycentric nature of environmental issues create an insurmountable barrier to any significant improvements through judicially enforced human rights. Chapter three introduces and defends the environmental minimum as a normative framework for systematically conceptualizing the relationship between human rights and the environment. As such, it is chiefly concerned with ensuring a good faith regulatory engagement with environmental pollution: specific risks to recognised human rights trigger the environmental minimum, which then provides minimum standards (legal, established and emerging) that set the standard of review for determining whether a violation of human rights has occurred. Chapter four deals with the crucial empirical argument, outlining how the framework can systematically account for and consistently guide the further development of the case law under the European Convention on Human Rights. This conclusion rests on a comprehensive analysis of the environmental case law since 1950 using quantitative methods to expose doctrinal patterns previously not recognized in legal scholarship. Finally, chapter five explores and evaluates the potential benefits of the environmental minimum framework beyond human rights adjudication. Specifically, it investigates benefits to the varied fields of public law, regulatory policy, International Environmental Law, constitutionalism, and other international human rights treaties.

The thesis provides an analysis of the developments in international environmental law achieved through judicial activity of international courts from circa 2005 onwards. Analysed is the relevant practice of the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the European Court for Human Rights, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. First chapter presents the general characteristics of their judicial activity in this area, while the subsequent chapters deal with each of the institutions, analysing the outcomes of their activity, particularly with regard to specifying obligations of states and the interpretation of human rights in connection with environmental protection, and the developments in the courts' handling of environmental cases. Attention is also given to possible setting up of a specialised international court for the environment.

Magister Legum - LLM / This mini-thesis analyses the international legal framework governing the protection of the natural environment during armed conflicts. It critically examines the normative rules in international humanitarian law and international environmental law in respect of environmental damage during armed conflicts and it highlights the strengths and shortcomings of international law in this regard. Furthermore, this thesis investigates how the regulatory structures of the African Union (AU) address the problem of environmental damage during armed conflict. It draws on the aforementioned analyses to determine how regional law in Africa differs from the international regime and in what ways the regional framework may serve to complement the international legal regime in order to strengthen the protection of the environment during armed conflict on the continent.

Magister Legum - LLM / The International Committee of the Red Cross/Crescent (ICRC) has been the only agency promoting the observance of the law of armed conflict. It has invested considerably in finding solutions to protecting people and regulates the means and methods of warfare. Throughout the development of the law of armed conflict, the protection of the environment was never the centre of focus. From the early 1868 Declaration of Saint Petersburg to the Hague Regulations of 1907, attention was given to weakening the military forces of the enemy and the right of the belligerents not to destroy or seize the enemy’s property, unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war. Through AP I, the basic principle of IHL was reaffirmed. The concepts of military necessity and proportionality became clearer, permitting only those acts of war which are proportional to the lawful objective of a military operation. Considering the cruelty experienced through the crises that occurred in the RC, it is therefore imperative for the administration to enforce their observation. In the light of the above background the aims of this research paper are to seek to explore the challenges that the current RC administration is facing in implementing IHL and IEL principles. In addition, the research paper will analyse the possibilities to promote the implementation of IHL and IEL instruments within the public domain, mostly the army, to dissipate any ignorance that occur. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has also made it clear that an obligation rests upon states to take environmental considerations into account during armed conflict in so far as these relate to states’ military objectives

[pt] Considerando a insuficiência do direito internacional ambiental frente às crises da era do antropoceno, a presente pesquisa busca analisar as questões fundacionais das normas jurídicas internacionais. Para tanto, primeiramente, será observado o discurso presente nas três principais declarações gerais do direito internacional ambiental (Declaração de Estocolmo, Declaração do Rio e O Futuro que Queremos) de maneira crítica e reflexiva. Em seguida, será explorada a construção de significados que sustentam a visão de mundo legitimada por essas normas, como o ideal por desenvolvimento, a colonialidade e certa concepção sobre natureza, humanidade e a relação entre eles. Por fim, serão levantados questionamentos sobre as possibilidades de futuros alternativos que derivam dessas categorias, como o reconhecimento dos direitos da natureza, e os limites que as categorias existentes impõem a imaginários dissidentes. Com isso, observa-se que a forma com que o direito internacional ambiental é construído pressupõe a não problematização da exclusão constitutiva de outros do sistema internacional moderno. Portanto, é necessário questionar essas próprias categorias fundacionais, não só do direito internacional (geral e ambiental), como do sistema internacional e estatal como um todo, como um convite para uma especulação construtiva sobre quais futuros somos capazes de imaginar e construir. / [en] Considering the shortcoming of international environmental law in dealing with the crises of the era of the Anthropocene, this research seeks to analyze some foundational categories of international legal norms. With this in mind, firstly, the discourse of the three main general declarations of international environmental law (Stockholm Declaration, Rio92 and Rio +20) will be observed in a critical and reflective way, with the help of an enunciative discourse analysis. Then, some accounts will be traced about the construction of meanings that support the ontology legitimized by these norms, such as the ideal for development, coloniality and a certain conception about nature, humanity and the relationship between them. Finally, considering the roles of imaginaries and constructions of futures, questions will be raised about the possibilities of alternative futures that derive from these concepts, such as the recognition of the rights of nature and the limits that the existing categories impose on dissident imaginaries. Hence, it can be observed that the way in which international environmental law is constructed presupposes that the constitutive exclusion of others from the modern international system is not problematized. Therefore, it is crucial to question these very foundational categories, not only of international law (general and environmental), but of the international and state systems as a whole, as an invitation to face the end of the world through constructive speculation about which futures we are able to imagine and build.

Climate change is the defining challenge of this generation, and transforming our energy systems is the largest part of solving this challenge. Nations have pledged goals in the distant future, but these are insufficient to keep the planet below 2℃ of warming. Citizens have taken legal action against states, and legal action between states seems soon to follow. Both have been studied substantially, though there has yet to be a comparison of different principles under international law and for the question to be contextualised within the energy transition. This gap will be addressed with the research question of this thesis which will seek to find how countries can be held legally responsible using the no-harm principle and human rights principle for not sufficiently undertaking a sustainable energy transition and, if possible, be forced to act more quickly. The question will be answered through a qualitative document analysis of relevant cases and legally binding treaties related to the No-harm principle and human rights approach. The findings demonstrate that the No-harm principle was the better option for pursuing such a case given its expansive authority through theResponsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (IWA) treaty, which codifies the No-harm principle into international law and has argued numerous environmental cases successfully. However, the No-harm principle and IWA can only be brought by states, which is challenging due to its implication for international relations. The human rights-based approach does not have this risk as citizens can bring cases forward, though there is a significant gap due to a lack of courts in some parts of the world. The results will suggest an ideal case based on these ideal characteristics: a Small Islands Developing Nation bringing a case against the G20 based on a violation of the No-harm principle and the IWA. Though this case was determined to be the most likely to succeed in inducing high emission countries to take action, the duration of such a case and its final process remains in question.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:30:03Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Natasha Martins do Valle Miranda.pdf: 1431946 bytes, checksum: ff71d5c4abb5ebecf121648ebc86cbfa (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-12-11 / Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo / International Environmental Law emerged in the last century and is constantly the target of various transformations due to the dynamics that currently surround international relations. Recently, the major challenge of this branch of International Public Law is to establish its own mechanisms for dispute settlement considering that the existing mechanisms for dispute settlement with respect to disputes that involve the protection of environment are limited. This limitations concern, in particular, the non-compulsory nature and the inter-state character of procedures that are available. Despite the deficiencies of the law, International Courts and Tribunal have issued judgments involving the protection of the environment, as the International Court of Justice, the Appellate Body of World Trade Organization and the Tribunal for Law of the Sea. In this scenario, discussions to face this challenge have been emerged; including several arguments have been advanced to justify the establishment of an International Environmental Court. In the other hand, arguments against the establishment of an International Environmental Court have been advanced as well. Due to these facts, this paper will analyze whether the establishment of an International Court able to judge disputes involving international environmental questions may be one of the tools to face this challenge / O Direito Internacional do Meio Ambiente surgiu no século passado e, a todo o momento, está sendo alvo de diversas transformações decorrentes do dinamismo o qual hoje abrange as relações internacionais. Atualmente, o grande desafio desse ramo do Direito Internacional Público é conseguir estabelecer os seus próprios mecanismos para solucionar controvérsias, visto que os mecanismos de solução de controvérsias existentes aptos a julgar conflitos envolvendo a proteção do meio ambiente são limitados. Essa limitação está relacionada particularmente com a falta de jurisdição obrigatória e com o fato de, via de regra, apenas os Estados-Nações poderem participar desses procedimentos disponíveis. Apesar dessas limitações, Cortes e Tribunais Internacionais vêm atuando em disputas envolvendo a proteção do meio ambiente, como a Corte Internacional de Justiça, o Órgão de Apelação da Organização Mundial do Comércio e o Tribunal Internacional sobre o Direito do Mar. Nesse cenário, surgiram diferentes discussões sobre como enfrentar tais limites, inclusive com vários argumentos para justificar a criação de um Tribunal Internacional do Meio Ambiente. Por outro lado, argumentos contrários ao seu estabelecimento também se desenvolveram. Diante dessa conjuntura, a presente dissertação tem o objetivo de analisar se a criação de uma Corte Internacional apta a julgar disputas envolvendo questões de Direito Internacional do Meio Ambiente pode ser uma das ferramentas para enfrentar essas limitações

O propósito do princípio da precaução é evitar danos irreversíveis ao meio ambiente e à saúde humana ao permitir a ação preventiva, mesmo na ausência de certeza científica sobre as causas ou conseqüências de determinada atividade. A precaução é uma resposta às novas tecnologias e aos fenômenos que podem provocar impactos irreparáveis e incomensuráveis e que, portanto, precisam ser revistos pela comunidade internacional, Estados e indivíduos. Significa, também, envolver a participação popular nas decisões sobre quais riscos são aceitáveis em determinada sociedade e quais devem ser evitados. A base sociológica sob a qual está baseado o trabalho é a teoria de Ulrich Beck sobre a sociedade de risco global. O princípio da precaução é analisado sob os prismas dogmático e funcional: as principais características do princípio são apresentadas, bem como as críticas ao instituto; também são expostas as funções do princípio da precaução, sua eficácia social e status jurídico. A fim de explicar as dificuldades que circundam o tema dos princípios do direito internacional do meio ambiente, as principais teorias dos princípios são analisadas, concluindo-se que os princípios do DIMA necessitam de uma teoria própria. Na última parte, o trabalho procura demonstrar como o princípio da precaução pode ser operacionalizado através do fortalecimento institucional, sobretudo da Convenção-Quadro das Nações Unidas sobre Mudança do Clima. O tema das mudanças climáticas é paradigmático, já que exige ação internacional preventiva a fim de evitar os impactos do aquecimento global, mesmo face à inexistência de consenso científico sobre as causas e consequências desse fenômeno. Ao permitir maior participação democrática e abrir espaço para que a percepção pública sobre os riscos possa refletir em decisões jurídico-políticas, o arranjo institucional criado pela Convenção permite, ainda que com algumas falhas, uma discussão maior sobre os desafios que circundam o tema. Considerando os fundamentos da teoria de Beck sobre a modernização reflexiva, a origem política dos riscos e a democratização das discussões sobre eles, o papel da subpolítica na sociedade atual e a irreversibilidade de catástrofes ambientais, conclui-se que o princípio da precaução é indispensável ao direito e à política ao inserir a responsabilização a priori dos possíveis danos e a participação social nas decisões futuras / The purpose of the precautionary principle is to avoid irreversible damage to the environment and human health by allowing preventive action, even in the absence of scientific certainty regarding the causes or consequences of certain activity. Precaution is an answer to new technologies and phenomena that may promote irreparable and incommensurable impacts and, therefore, need to be reviewed beforehand by the international community, states and individuals. Furthermore, it nurtures popular participation in decision-making regarding what risks are acceptable in a given society and what risks should be avoided. The sociological foundation of this work is Ulrich Becks world risk society. The precautionary principle is analysed under the dogmatic and functional viewpoints: the principles main characteristics and critiques are presented, and I also explore the precautionary principles functions, social efficacy, and legal status. In order to explain the difficulties pertaining to the subject of international environmental law, this thesis analyzes the main theories on legal principles, and concludes that a more suitable theory for international environmental law principles is needed. In the last part, this work demonstrates how the precautionary principle can be operationalized through institutional strengthening, especially of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Climate change is a paradigmatic case, since it demands international preventive action in order to avoid the impacts of global warming, even in the absence of scientific consensus regarding its causes and consequences. By allowing greater democratic participation and by creating space for communication so that public perception can be reflected in legal and political decisions, the institutional arrangement created by the Convention allows for, if imperfectly, a wider discussion about the challenges of climate change. Considering the foundations of Becks theory about reflexive modernization, the political origin of risks and the democratization of discussions on risks, the role of subpolitics in modern society and irreversibility of environmental catastrophes, this work concludes that the precautionary principle is indispensable to law and politics by adding a priori responsibility of possible damages and social participation in future decisions.